4.7 Article

Enhancement of strength of adhesive bond between wood and metal using atmospheric plasma treatment

期刊

CELLULOSE
卷 27, 期 11, 页码 6411-6424

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10570-020-03212-8

关键词

Adhesives; Bonding; Metals; Wood; Plasma; Tensile shear strength; Surface

资金

  1. Slovenian Research Agency [P4-0015, P2-0082]
  2. European Union [745936]
  3. Marie Curie Actions (MSCA) [745936] Funding Source: Marie Curie Actions (MSCA)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Combinations of wood and metal are interesting hybrid composite materials, joining together the low density of wood with the stiffness and strength of metals. Different types of adhesives are used to connect wood and metal elements, but the compatibility between adhesives used and load-bearing materials must be sufficient, which often is challenging. In adhesive bonding technology, surface treatments are a crucial step in the process. In this study, an atmospheric plasma discharge was employed to enhance the adhesion strength of joints between common beech (Fagus sylvatica L.) wood, metals (steel and aluminum alloy), and four different types of adhesives. The optical properties of plasma discharges and its influence on treated substrates' surface morphology depended on the inherent properties of the treated materials. X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy revealed the surface oxidation of all the materials after plasma treatment. Consequently, the surface free energy of all materials increased as well. The positive effect of the plasma treatment on the tensile shear strength of single-lap joints shows a high potential of atmospheric plasma treatment technology for enhancement of adhesives strength of joints combining wooden elements, wood and steel, or wood and aluminum alloys. In addition to that, expensive epoxy and polyurethane adhesives could be replaced by more affordable polyvinyl acetate and melamine-urea-formaldehyde adhesives, and still perform at equal levels if the plasma was applied prior to bonding.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据